TREASURY

Pensions Tax Simplification

Ivan Lewis: The new simplified regime for the taxation of pensions begins on 6 April 2006. I can today announce that registered pension schemes will be permitted to submit reports and returns in paper form for at least six months before the requirement to submit information online becomes mandatory.
	HMRC's Pension Schemes Online service will become available over a number of releases throughout 2006–07. Pension Scheme administrators and practitioners will be able to meet most of their statutory filing requirements online at the time that they are required, but paper returns and reporting will also be offered as a supplementary means of filing for a limited period.
	HMRC will continue to work closely with the industry over the forthcoming months to support the implementation of the new regime. HMRC will be holding discussions with the pensions industry and software suppliers to establish what issues this delay may present and how best to address them, before moving to a mandatory online filing regime.
	This delay will not affect HMRC's ability to deliver Pensions Tax Simplification on 6th April 2006. The vast majority of pension schemes and their members will also not be affected by this delay. The new pensions regime heralds greater opportunities for 15 million pension savers to save more into a pension scheme and enjoy the associated flexibilities around contributions and the taking of retirement benefits.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Association of British Insurers

Elliot Morley: I am pleased to report to the House that the Association of British Insurers (ABI) has agreed a revised Statement of Principles on flood insurance taking into account commitments made by the Government on our programme to manage flood risk. It updates the existing Statement introduced in January 2003. The revised Statement, which is attached, will come into effect on 1 January 2006, and reflects the continued partnership between the industry and the Government.
	In relation to the commitments made under the Statement of Principles, Government have significantly increased investment in flood management since 1997 and is committed to levels of spend of £570 million a year throughout the 2004 spending period to 2007–08. This is over £250 million a year more than in 1997. The Environment Agency is committed to delivering a programme of efficiencies that will be re-invested in flood management so as to maintain outputs in real terms. We are on target to deliver increased protection to over 80,000 houses since April 2003 and Operating Authorities have a forward programme of works which is planned to deliver the reduction in risk agreed with the ABI.
	The Environment Agency has published on their internet site an interactive flood map for England and Wales which shows the areas of land that could be at risk of flooding from rivers and the sea. The Agency is continually working to improve and update the information on flood defences and its flood mapping, and is committed to sharing this with all stakeholders.
	Water and sewerage company plans to reduce public sewer flooding problems formed an important part of OfWat's price review for the period 2005–10. Over the next five years, almost £1 billion will be invested in the public sewer network to reduce significantly the risk of properties being flooded by sewage.
	The Government have published its first response to the 'Making space for water' consultation including commitments to review and strengthen the planning process in flood risk locations, initiate pilot projects to develop integrated drainage partnerships in urban areas, encourage the uptake of property level resilience measures and to give the Environment Agency a strategic overview role for all types of flooding.
	ABI UPDATED STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
	General policy
	It is the intention of ABI members that flood insurance for existing domestic properties and small businesses should continue to be available for as many customers as possible. The premiums charged and other terms—such as excesses—will reflect the risk of flooding but will be offered in a competitive market. There is separate ABI guidance on flood risk and new development.
	This revised Statement of Principles will apply from 1 January 2006 but is subject to review in the event of significant external shocks such as withdrawal of flood reinsurance. Successfuloperation of the Statement is dependent on action by the Government to manage flood risk effectively.
	Current position
	The majority of the 2.2 million properties in flood risk areas are already protected to a minimum standard of 1.3 per cent. annual probability (one in 75 years) or better. However, around 15 per cent. of properties in the floodplain have a significant chance of flooding (greater than 1.3 per cent. annual probability). In some of these areas there are planned improvements to flood defences to reduce the risk, but there are other areas where there are no plans for improvement.
	Despite these risks, insurers have continued to provide flood cover for the vast majority of customers in the UK.
	Insurers' renewed commitment
	Areas where flood risk is 1.3 per cent. annual probability (or one in 75 years) or less:
	Flood cover will be available as a standard feature of household and small business policies. The level to which properties are defended above this standard will vary considerably and premiums will reflect different degrees of risk. Highly populated coastal areas, in particular, should be protected to a higher standard because of the potential consequences should a flood occur.
	Areas of significant flood risk (greater than 1.3 per cent. annual probability or one in 75 years) where improved defences are planned:
	Insurers will maintain flood cover for domestic properties and small businesses that they already insure where improvements in flood protection schemes sufficient to reduce the likelihood of flooding to 1.3 per cent. annual probability or less are scheduled for completion within the next five years. This will operate as a rolling five-year commitment provided the Statement of Principles remains in force. Delays or disruptions could take a scheme beyond the five-year commitment. The premiums charged and other policy terms—such as excesses—will reflect the risk.
	If a domestic property in this category is sold the current insurer will continue to provide cover, subject to satisfactory information about the new owners of the property, especially their previous claims record. Where a small business is sold the current insurer will consider whether to continue to provide cover; this will depend heavily on the proposed new use of the premises and the previous claims record of the new owner.
	Areas of significant flood risk (greater than 1.3 per cent. annual probability or one in 75 years) where no improvements in defences are planned:
	In these areas, insurers cannot guarantee to maintain cover, but will examine the risks on a case-by-case basis. Insurers will use their best efforts to continue to provide cover and will work with the owners of domestic properties and small businesses which they currently insure to see what action could be taken by the property owner, the Environment Agency and the local authority to make the property insurable in some form. This action might include the use of accredited products, flood resilient materials and temporary defences to defend the property.
	Action from Government
	Continued operation of this Statement will depend on Government progress on the five key actions set out below, with an annual review of progress against specific performance targets, and a more comprehensive assessment after three years:
	Reducing the annual probability of flooding each year for a substantial number of properties in the UK, a proportion of which currently have a significant chance of flooding (greater than 1.3 per cent. annual probability).
	At least maintaining investment in flood management each year, so that outputs can be sustained in real terms, with a commitment to evidence-based discussions on future funding needs, taking account of climate change and other factors affecting risk.
	Implementing reforms to the land-use planning system to ensure that new developments do not lead to an increase in national or local flood risk.
	Communicating flood risk effectively, including providing higher quality and more detailed information on flood risk, and on existing, new and upcoming flood protection schemes.
	Developing an integrated approach to urban drainage that alleviates the risks of sewer flooding and flash-flooding.

Levy Board Report

Margaret Beckett: Rosemary Radcliffe has completed her independent review of UK agricultural and horticultural levy bodies, and her report is published today. Copies are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses. My ministerial colleagues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and I wish to offer our thanks to the Reviewer for the thorough and inclusive way in which she has carried out her work.
	In summary, the Reviewer finds that there is still a case for statutory levies to address issues of market failure in the sectors in question, and she makes recommendations for a new structure to meet the sectors' needs in future. This includes proposed arrangements for improving governance, flexibility, focus inactivities undertaken, levy collection arrangements, and operations and service delivery, to increase overall value for money for, and accountability to the levy payer.
	My noble Friend Lord Bach is today launching a full consultation on the report so that the views of stakeholders, and in particular levy payers, can be taken into account before formal policy proposals are developed. This consultation will run for 12 weeks, and a further statement will be made thereafter.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

UK Presidency: General Affairs and External Relations Council

Douglas Alexander: A General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) was held on 7 November in Brussels. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary (Mr. Jack Straw) and I chaired the Council as Presidency. I also represented the UK on certain agenda items.
	The agenda items were covered as follows:
	Report on Informal Heads of State/Government meeting (Hampton Court, 27 October 2005)
	The Presidency presented the six remits from Hampton Court: Research and Development, Universities, Demographic challenge, Energy, Migration, and the Common Foreign and Security Policy/European Security and Defence Policy (CFSP/ESDP). The Commission said they would take forward the first five remits, in consultation with the current and future Presidencies. The High Representative, in association, where appropriate, with the Presidency, the future Presidency and the European Commission, agreed to take forward work in the area of CFSP/ESDP.
	World Trade Organisation (WTO)/Doha Development Agenda (DDA)
	Following up the extensive GAERC discussion and agreed Conclusions of 18 October, Commissioner Mandelson updated the Council on the state of play in the DDA negotiations in the light of its recent conditional offer and forthcoming meetings among WTO members. The Commission confirmed that it was continuing to act within its mandate, and would continue to ensure that the Council was fully informed of developments in the negotiations. The Council also agreed, as an A point, Conclusions noting support for Saudi accession to the WTO.
	Financial Perspectives 2007–13
	The Council exchanged views on the EU's budget for 2007–13 and identified the areas that will need to be addressed in order for the Presidency to reach an agreement at the 15/16 December European Council: (i) the structure of EU spending; (ii) modernising the budget, including a timetable for review; and (iii) the system of EU own resources. The Presidency concluded that work on these areas should continue and that it would return to the issue at the 21/22 November GAERC.
	Belarus
	The Presidency introduced the item noting the deteriorating situation on human rights and political freedoms in Belarus. High Representative Solana underlined the difficulty faced by the EU in trying to bring about reform. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner agreed noting their efforts to realign aid towards support for civil society. A large number of delegations spoke expressing concern at the deteriorating situation and highlighting the need to intensify contact and support to civil society. The Council also noted the importance of free and fair Presidential elections in 2006 and called for the Belarusian Government to issue an early invitation to an OSCE/ODIHR monitoring mission. The Council expressed willingness to take appropriate restrictive measures against responsible individuals in the event of a failure to uphold international standards. Council Conclusions were agreed which committed the Council to a further GAERC discussion in January 2006.
	Kosovo
	Over lunch the Council held a discussion with Martti Ahtisaari, the UN Secretary General's future Kosovo Status Envoy. Ahtisaari welcomed EU involvement in the Status process and gave an initial indication of how he intended to take forward his mandate. He also flagged the importance of addressing Kosovo's poor economic situation. High Representative Solana nominated Stefan Lehne as EU Representative to the Kosovo Status Process. The Council expressed strong support for Ahtisaari's appointment and endorsement of Stefan Lehne as EU representative. Council Conclusions were agreed.
	Iran
	The Council reviewed the EU's overall relations with Iran. They condemned President Ahmadinejad's reported remarks calling for Israel to be wiped from the map. They agreed that recent developments had been discouraging in the EU's main areas of concern, including Iran's approach to WMD and terrorism, the human rights situation, and Iran's policies towards the Middle East Peace Process and regional issues. They noted the importance of the EU/Iran Comprehensive Dialogue, and urged Iran to take steps to resume substantive discussions under the EU/Iran Human Rights Dialogue and to demonstrate by its actions that it is willing to improve respect for human rights.They agreed to keep the EU's relations with Iran under close review. Council Conclusions were agreed.
	Syria/Lebanon
	The Council underlined the significance of the unanimity achieved on UN Security Council Resolution 1636 on Syrian and reviewed progress on the implementation of UNSCR 1559. Council Conclusions were agreed.
	MEPP
	The Council discussed an invitation from James Wolfensohn, Quartet Special Envoy for Disengagement, on behalf of Israel and the Palestinian Authority for the EU to play a monitoring role at Rafah on the Egypt-Gaza border. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner and High Representative Solana highlighted that an EU role in this area would help build confidence. In discussion Member States supported the idea of EU involvement in a non-executive monitoring role. This was the fruit of a continuous effort on the ground, which would reinforce the EU's political role. The Presidency concluded that there was a general endorsement for the proposals by the High Representative and the Commission. Council Conclusions were agreed.
	Iraq
	The Council agreed Conclusions that welcomed the 15 October referendum on the Iraqi Constitution.
	UN World Summit follow-up
	The Presidency introduced this item, noting that effective follow-up to the UN Summit was a priority for the EU. Member States highlighted certain aspects such as the Peace-building Commission, Human Rights Council, and Counter-Terrorism as key areas for urgent action. The Council agreed extensive Conclusions that set out the agreed EU position on all the key areas of Summit implementation.
	Avian Flu
	The Presidency introduced the item, noting the earlier discussion at the GAERC on 18 October. The Commission noted that work within the EU was well advanced. The Council agreed Conclusions that detailed the range of work under way, including a comprehensive action plan.
	AoB—Colombia
	Dutch Foreign Minister Bot highlighted the importance of EU support for the peace process in Colombia. The Presidency noted that the 3 October GAERC had agreed Conclusions on support for the peace process in Colombia, which set the framework for EU policy.
	AoB—Cuba
	The Czech Republic highlighted the problems faced by their Embassy in Havana in celebrating their national day.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Police Force Structures Review

Charles Clarke: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary's (HMIC) report, "Closing the Gap", published in September 2005 concluded that the current 43 force structure in England and Wales was no longer "fit for purpose". The report recommended that the best business solution was for the police service to reconfigure based on strategic forces of sufficient size to provide both effective neighbourhood policing and protective services to combat serious organised crime and terrorism.
	Following the publication of the HMIC report, the Home Secretary asked all police forces and authorities to consider the best options for their region and to submit them to him by 23 December 2005. The first stage in this process was for police forces and police authorities to develop by the end of October short listed options for each region. This stage has now been completed and feedback has been provided to all chief officers and chairs of police authorities indicating which proposals appear to be most favourable for each of the nine Government Office regions in England and for Wales. The options identified for further development are set out below, although authorities are still free to develop alternative options alongside these.
	In recommending particular options, the arguments put forward by forces and authorities have been carefully considered along with the need to create a balanced and resilient policing landscape across the whole of England and Wales. Neighbourhood and Basic Command Unit (ECU) level policing remain the essential local face of the police service, and by ensuring greater resilience and capability in our police service we will help maintain this service, whilst at the same time strengthening the capacity to deal with serious and organised crimes, major incidents and counter-terrorism.
	Forces and authorities are now being asked to complete a cost benefit analysis for all of their short listed options. They will then develop a business case and initial implementation plans for their recommended option to be submitted to the Home Secretary.
	The Secretary of State for Transport announced in a written statement on 11 October that, in the context of this review, he would be reviewing separately the role of the British Transport Police (BTP) Proposals for the British Transport Police will be brought forward, if appropriate, once the outcome of that review is known.
	My right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Policing, Security and Community Safety (Ms Hazel Blears) has written to all Parliamentary colleagues on this matter inviting them to join the consultation process.
	
		
			  
		
		
			 Options assessed at this stage as suitable for progression 
			 South East 1. Two strategic forces: Kent, Surrey and Sussex; Thames Valley and Hampshire 
			  2. Three strategic forces: Kent; Thames Valley; Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire 
			  3. Three strategic forces: Kent, Surrey and Sussex; Thames Valley; Hampshire 
			  4. Three strategic forces: Kent and Sussex; Thames Valley; Hampshire and Surrey 
			  5. Four strategic forces: Kent; Thames Valley; Surrey and Sussex; Hampshire 
			 South West 1. Regional South West force 
			  2. Two strategic forces: Devon and Cornwall; Avon and Somerset, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Dorset 
			 West 1. Regional West Midlands force 
			 Midlands 2. Two strategic forces: Staffordshire and West Mercia; Warwickshire and West Midlands 
			 East Midlands 1. Regional East Midlands force 
			  2. Two strategic forces: Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire; Leicestershire, Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire 
			 Eastern 1. Regional Eastern force 
			  2. Two strategic forces: Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Essex; Suffolk, Norfolk and Cambridgeshire 
			  3. Two strategic forces: Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex; Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire 
			 Yorkshire and 1. Regional Yorkshire and Humberside force 
			 Humberside 2. Two strategic forces: West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire; South Yorkshire and Humberside 
			 North East 1. Regional North East force 
			 North West 1. Three strategic forces: Lancashire and Cumbria; Cheshire and Merseyside; Greater Manchester Police 
			  2. Two strategic forces: Lancashire, Cumbria and Merseyside; Cheshire and Greater Manchester Police 
			 Wales 1. National Wales force 
			 London 1. Strategic force: Metropolitan Police Service and the City of London 
			  2. Collaboration between the Metropolitan Police Service and the City of London 
			 BTP 1. Proposals for the British Transport Police will be brought forward, if appropriate, once the outcome of the current DfT review is known